U-600017, Clarifies Use of Phrase W/Generic Implications in Third Criterion for Termination of Util Overinsp Program Discussed in .Further Reinsp for Nonconforming Condition Unique to Item Would Not Be Productive

From kanterella
(Redirected from U-600017)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Clarifies Use of Phrase W/Generic Implications in Third Criterion for Termination of Util Overinsp Program Discussed in .Further Reinsp for Nonconforming Condition Unique to Item Would Not Be Productive
ML20116M777
Person / Time
Site: Clinton Constellation icon.png
Issue date: 04/26/1985
From: Hall D
ILLINOIS POWER CO.
To: James Keppler
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
References
U-600017, NUDOCS 8505060347
Download: ML20116M777 (2)


Text

"'

L 4 U-600017 N OT L3 7-8 5 (0 4 -2 6 ) -L 1A.120

/LLINDIS POWER COMPANY CLINTON POV ER STATION P.O. BOX 678. CLINTON. ILUNOIS 61727 April 26, 1985 UICRITYECLM p~~ ;pg L -

\ /y .Ca il -

Docket No. 50-461 g),Q __

Mr. James G. Keppler Regional Administrator Region III U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 799 Roosevelt Road Glen Ellyn, Illinois 60137

Subject:

Termination of Illinois Power (IP) Company Overinspection Program Activities

Reference:

1) Letter, D. P. hall to J. G. Keppler, Proposed Changes in the IP Overinspection Program, File No. U-0828 of March 29, 1985.
2) Meeting between the USNRC and IP on April 22, 1985, in the Offices of the USNRC, Region III in Glen Ellyn, Illinois

Dear Mr. Keppler:

In Reference 1, IP proposed three criteria for termination of IP Overinspection Program reinspections of safety-related commodities.

During our April 22nd meeting (reference 2), IP was requested by the NRC to clarify the intent of the third of these criteria. Specifically, the NRC requested clarification of the criterion in Reference 1, Attachment 1, Paragraph III.C, which states, "The reinspections for a commodity did not identify any nonconformance which had safety-significance with generic I

implications" (cmphasis added).

The phrase "with generic implications" used by IP in this criterion refers to a safety significant nonconforming condition in one item where that same type of condition could occur in other items in the plant. Use of this phrase to qualify the third termination criterion is intended to allow satisfaction of the criterion even if a nonconfctming condition is identified that has safety significane u buc because of unique hardware, engineering or installarith 'aracteristics, it is demonstrably isolable to the item f.e wl 5 ,; it is identified. If it is 8505060347 850426 DR ADOCK 05000461 gpq qg B3d I c PDR (

'E. E 0 /

l L

. .b l

determined that a particular nonconforming condition is unique to the item in which it is identified, further reinspection for this condition in other items would not be productive.

We hope this clarifies our intent with regard to the phrase "with generic implications". Should further information be required in this matter, please contact me.

Sincerely yours, D. P. Hall Vice President JEK/jsp cc: Director, Office of I&E, USNRC, Washington, D.C. 20555 B. L. Siegel, NRC Clinton Licensing Project Manager NRC Resident Office Illinois Department of Nuclear Safety Allen Samelson, Assistant Attorney General, State of Illinois 4

h

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _